How to Choose a Maritime CMMS: 32-Criteria Scorecard and RFP Template

Choosing a maritime CMMS is not an IT purchase — it is an operational decision. The system you select will shape how your chief engineers log running hours, how your superintendent builds a drydocking work list, and how your Designated Person Ashore proves to a class surveyor or a Port State Control officer that the planned maintenance system is genuinely being followed. A poor choice is not paid for in wasted licences; it is paid for in off-hire days, non-conformities and crews who quietly go back to spreadsheets.

Most comparisons stop at a list of ticked features. On board, however, a feature is worthless without the conditions in which it must run: intermittent satellite connectivity, crews rotating every six weeks, and an auditor asking for a time-stamped record from three years ago. We previously published a shorter overview in 10 criteria for choosing your CMMS software; this article goes considerably further.

What follows is a complete method: how to frame the requirement before comparing anything, a 32-criteria scorecard grouped into 6 families, a weighting and scoring method, the trap questions to ask during a demo, a reusable RFP template, the red flags that should stop a deal, and a three-year total cost of ownership model with a worked example.

1. Frame the requirement before you compare anything

A scorecard applied without framing always produces the same outcome: the vendor who ticks the most boxes wins, and you buy a system nobody on board uses. Start by writing down four parameters.

Fleet size and structure

An operator with two pilot boats has nothing in common with a fifteen-ferry company. Below three vessels, ease of use and speed of roll-out dominate. Between four and fifteen, the real subject is standardisation: identical equipment hierarchies, identical job codes, a shared spare parts catalogue — without it, fleet consolidation is meaningless. Above that, permissions, shared master data and integration with the company's information system carry the most weight.

Vessel type and trading pattern

Vessel type determines which modules actually matter. A superyacht needs precise crew certification tracking and a clean history that protects resale value. A ferry must produce passenger lists compliant with IMO FAL Form 6 and squeeze maintenance into short port stays — hence an integrated passenger module rather than a parallel spreadsheet. Tugs and pilot boats run high engine hours and need reliable counter-based triggering. Deep-sea fishing and offshore support units sail long: onboard spare parts management becomes the number one issue.

Organisational maturity

• Level 0 — paper and spreadsheets. The issue is adoption, not functional depth: pick a tool the crew masters in half a day, on a narrow scope before opening purchasing and stock.
• Level 1 — a CMMS exists but is not used on board. The cause is almost always mobile usability and the offline mode. Synchronisation becomes the decisive criterion.
• Level 2 — a CMMS is used, but the data is not exploitable. You are looking for analytics, fleet consolidation, cost indicators and interfaces to finance.

Class, flag and insurance constraints

List exactly what you are subject to before writing a single requirement: the ISM Code and SMS audits, any class-approved PMS scheme, Port State Control regimes, Flag State requirements, MLC 2006 for certificates and rest hours, and P&I obligations. Each constraint becomes a traceability requirement, not a checkbox. Our article on the ISM Code and maintenance compliance explains how.

2. The 32-criteria scorecard, in 6 families

Every criterion below is written so it can be verified live. If you cannot see the answer on screen, treat the criterion as unmet.

Family A — Onboard functionality (6 criteria)

Family B — Shore-side and fleet management (5 criteria)

Family C — Mobility, offline mode and synchronisation (5 criteria)

Family D — Compliance and audit (5 criteria)

Family E — Integrations, API and interoperability (5 criteria)

Family F — Vendor, contract and longevity (6 criteria)

3. Weighting and scoring

Thirty-two criteria are not equal. Without weighting, a scorecard mechanically favours broad generic systems rich in secondary features.

Step 1 — define knock-out criteria

Before scoring anything, isolate three to five knock-out criteria: fail one and the vendor is out, whatever the total. For a deep-sea fleet, C1 (true offline), D1 (audit trail) and F3 (reversibility) are obvious candidates. This step typically halves the long list within a week.

Step 2 — weight by family

Distribute 100 points across the six families. A realistic split for a six-vessel passenger operator: onboard 25, shore 20, mobility 20, compliance 20, integrations 5, vendor and contract 10. A permanently connected harbour fleet will drop mobility to 10 and raise integrations to 15.

Step 3 — score from 0 to 4

• 0 — absent.
• 1 — on the roadmap, not demonstrated.
• 2 — present, but with a manual workaround.
• 3 — present and demonstrated on your own data.
• 4 — present, demonstrated, and in production with a reference comparable to your fleet.

Refuse to award a 3 if the demo ran on the vendor's sample data. Insist on loading a real extract: one of your engines, ten of your parts, three of your certificates. Nothing exposes a non-maritime system dressed up as a ship CMMS faster.

Step 4 — calculate and interpret the gap

A family score is the average of its criteria, scaled to 4 and multiplied by the family weight; the total out of 100 makes offers comparable. Below a 10-point gap, the score does not decide: crew adoption and support quality will. Above 20 points, the gap is structural.

4. Trap questions to ask during the demo

A vendor demo is a guided tour. These questions take it off the rails and reveal a system's real maturity in minutes.

• "Switch off the Wi-Fi now, and raise an unplanned job with two photos." The single most valuable question in the whole process.
• "Show me what happens when ship and shore edit the same job during the offline window."
• "A chief engineer signs off and a relief arrives: show the handover, and what the newcomer sees of the history."
• "A running-hours reading was mistyped three weeks ago. Correct it in front of me, and show what a surveyor will see."
• "Produce a full export of all my data, attachments included, as if I were terminating tomorrow."
• "Who answers the phone at 22:00 on a Sunday if the vessel cannot log in before an inspection?"
• "May I speak to a customer operating my vessel type, without you on the call?"

Key takeaway: a vendor who will not cut the connection, will not touch your real data, and will not give you a direct reference has told you everything without saying it. Three refusals equal an elimination.

5. RFP template you can reuse

Use this structure as it stands. It fits in eight to twelve pages and works for fleets up to roughly thirty vessels.

1. Company profile — activity, shore and seagoing headcount, maintenance organisation, project contacts.
2. Fleet description — table of name, type, length, build year, propulsion power, flag, classification society, trading area, available connectivity.
3. Current situation — tools in use, volumes (equipment items, active jobs, stock references), ranked pain points.
4. Measurable objectives — for example maintenance plan completion above 90%, zero expired certificates, critical spare lead time halved.
5. Functional scope — reproduce the 32 criteria, marking each mandatory, desirable or optional.
6. Technical requirements — offline mode, mobile operating systems, browsers, onboard bandwidth, intended hardware.
7. Security and compliance — hosting, data protection and DPA, encryption, backups, continuity plan, roles and access control.
8. Integrations — target systems and versions, flow direction, frequency, volumes, interface owner.
9. Data migration — scope, source format, who captures, who validates, acceptance criteria.
10. Roll-out and change management — pilot vessel, schedule aligned with port calls and crew changes, training, first-90-days support.
11. Contractual requirements — term, SLA, penalties, price indexation, reversibility, data ownership, continuity on change of control.
12. Financial response format — a mandatory grid: cost per vessel per month, onboarding, migration, training day rate, fixed-price interfaces, 3-year TCO.
13. Selection process — timetable, published weighting, demo scenarios you supply, references required.

Impose the financial response format: without a common grid, offers cannot be compared. Our per-vessel monthly pricing is public, which already removes one unknown.

6. Red flags

• Offline mode "under development". At sea, an announced feature does not exist.
• Data export charged for or restricted. Paid reversibility is lock-in with better manners.
• Demos only on sample data. This almost always hides a rigid data model.
• A quotation with no data migration line. It is the most underestimated item and the usual cause of overruns.
• A generic industrial CMMS repainted as maritime. No vessel entity, no multiple counters, no certificates, no crew rotations: you will pay for customisation three times over.
• No comparable maritime reference. You would be funding the vendor's learning curve.
• Support by web form only, in one language, within one time zone's office hours.
• A roadmap with no track record. Ask for the last twelve months of releases, not the next twelve months of promises.
• A contract with no quantified SLA. "Best efforts" commits no one.

7. Three-year total cost of ownership

The licence rarely accounts for more than half of real spend. Below is a worked example for a six-vessel fleet, assuming a subscription of EUR 100 per vessel per month.

These figures are orders of magnitude observed on projects of comparable size, not a price list; they move sharply with the quality of your starting data. What matters is the structure of the cost. The gap between the two scenarios does not come from the subscription — which is actually higher in A — but from custom development and internal time. That is exactly what a licence-price comparison never shows.

Two items are still missing and often decide the case: the cost of a non-conformity or a delayed departure, where a single avoided off-hire day repays years of subscription, and operational gains such as fewer emergency purchases and less dormant stock. See reducing vessel maintenance costs.

8. After signature, implementation decides everything

A perfect scorecard does not protect against a failed roll-out. Three rules: start with a pilot vessel on a narrow scope; appoint one named champion on board and one ashore; never migrate data you already know is wrong. Our implementation checklist covers the detail.

FAQ

How long does it take to choose a maritime CMMS?

Allow eight to twelve weeks for a fleet under ten vessels: two weeks of framing, two of market consultation, three to four of demos run on your own data, two of contract negotiation. Under six weeks you are buying an impression rather than evidence.

Generic industrial CMMS or maritime CMMS?

A generic CMMS handles factory maintenance well, but by design it ignores the vessel as an entity, multiple counters, flag and class certificates, crew rotations and offline operation. Those gaps are closed with custom development whose cost surfaces in the three-year TCO. We compare both approaches in why choose maritime CMMS software.

How do I really test offline mode during a demo?

Ask for flight mode on the demo device, then perform four actions: open an equipment history, raise an unplanned job, attach two photos, and close a planned job. Restore connectivity and check everything arrived with no loss and no duplicates. Our maintenance module is built for that scenario.

What must a reversibility clause contain?

Three things: the export format (open and documented), the exported scope (data and attachments, including photos and certificate PDFs), and the maximum delivery time after request. Add that exports are free throughout the contract and for six months after termination.

How do I weight a fleet of very different vessel types?

Build one scorecard per homogeneous segment and keep a single shared family: vendor and contract. You end up with two functional scores and one contractual score. If nothing exceeds 70 out of 100 on both segments, consider two tools rather than a mediocre compromise — provided fleet consolidation remains possible by export.

Conclusion

Choosing a maritime CMMS comes down to one question: in three years, will I be able to prove in fifteen minutes that maintenance on every vessel is done, recorded and correctly funded? The scorecard, the weighting, the trap questions and the three-year TCO exist to answer that with evidence instead of brochures.

Smart Sailors is a maritime CMMS built by seafarers, in service on more than 400 vessels, with a mobile app that genuinely works offline and 12 modules covering maintenance, equipment, stock, purchasing, certificates and crew. The fairest way to test us against your own scorecard is to run it: book a demo with your data, or start a 30-day free trial — flight mode included.